I went from a 195 to a 205 and it has been good.
New Tire Purchase question
- Thread starter toyotaguy
- Start date
- Status
I've gone with wider tires on two vehicles. An 01 Civic with OE 185/(65)'s were visibly very narrow, switched to 195/(60)s. Picked that size because Honda actually speced that size for the 05 Civic, same body style.
Went from 205 to 225 on an Altima, mostly because of more tire choices, and they didn't have the tire I was interested in, in stock at DT.
Originally Posted By: toyotaguy
These are the rims I have on my corolla
MB Wheels Seven X
15X6.5 4-100/11438SM
How do you like those wheels? I've looked at those at DT for the Civic, to replace the rusting OE steel.
Nice looking wheel though.
Went from 205 to 225 on an Altima, mostly because of more tire choices, and they didn't have the tire I was interested in, in stock at DT.
Originally Posted By: toyotaguy
These are the rims I have on my corolla
MB Wheels Seven X
15X6.5 4-100/11438SM
How do you like those wheels? I've looked at those at DT for the Civic, to replace the rusting OE steel.
Nice looking wheel though.
Originally Posted By: toyotaguy
These are the rims I have on my corolla
Manufacturer's Logo
MB Wheels Seven X
15X6.5 4-100/11438SM
215/60-15 tire is perfect fit for 15X6.5 wheel.
These are the rims I have on my corolla
Manufacturer's Logo
MB Wheels Seven X
15X6.5 4-100/11438SM
215/60-15 tire is perfect fit for 15X6.5 wheel.
I did this exact change on an older subaru legacy and can tell you my experience.
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
Just put the two tires next to each other and you will see the 205/60 is much beefier. That is a common upgrade that works great. Forget about the mpg theory junk, there will be no difference. More traction and better ride over potholes is WELL worth it. The tires will even wear longer. Trust me.
There are a lot of choices in that size. My fav is Goodyear Eagle GT.
I lost roughly 1 mpg. In fact, I've done this on 3 cars and lost a small mpg on all of them, even factoring the minor differences in diameter. On my 2002 accord, it was closer to 2 mpg.
A narrow tire tends to track straight easier, provided it's a quality tire, in my experience. A wider tire is more stable, handles better, corners better, looks better. A narrow tire is less apt to hydroplane.
The width of the rim is important. measure your rim width. make sure it's not too narrow for the 205. tire rack will have the specs for that size tire on the "specs" tab.
If the tire size results in a more rounded case profile, the ride will not be as harsh. If the sidewall ends up looking flat, you'll feel bumps more.
the 205/60 would be a good fit (check rim width). I think the 60 series is a great comprimise between comfort and handling.
M
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
Just put the two tires next to each other and you will see the 205/60 is much beefier. That is a common upgrade that works great. Forget about the mpg theory junk, there will be no difference. More traction and better ride over potholes is WELL worth it. The tires will even wear longer. Trust me.
There are a lot of choices in that size. My fav is Goodyear Eagle GT.
I lost roughly 1 mpg. In fact, I've done this on 3 cars and lost a small mpg on all of them, even factoring the minor differences in diameter. On my 2002 accord, it was closer to 2 mpg.
A narrow tire tends to track straight easier, provided it's a quality tire, in my experience. A wider tire is more stable, handles better, corners better, looks better. A narrow tire is less apt to hydroplane.
The width of the rim is important. measure your rim width. make sure it's not too narrow for the 205. tire rack will have the specs for that size tire on the "specs" tab.
If the tire size results in a more rounded case profile, the ride will not be as harsh. If the sidewall ends up looking flat, you'll feel bumps more.
the 205/60 would be a good fit (check rim width). I think the 60 series is a great comprimise between comfort and handling.
M
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: meep
I lost roughly 1 mpg.
Same tire model, just different size?
I lost roughly 1 mpg.
Same tire model, just different size?
lessee if I can recall:
97 subaru:
oem bridgestone 185/70r14 to bridgestone turanza 205/60r15
lost 1mpg. upgraded to 15 alloys (oem take-offs). Much more fun to drive and car looked better. the rounded sidewall ate up small bumps and road rumble. well worth the 1 mpg.
2002 accord tiger paw 195/65r15 to potenza 205/60r15
lost 2 mpg. car felt heavier more sure-footed, looked better, the rounded sidewall ate up small bumps and road rumble. at 3$ gas the mpg hit was annoying.
Also did it to a pathfinder but I don't recall the sizes and don't want to make it up. These two I remember. It was about the same 1 mpg or so.
Mike
97 subaru:
oem bridgestone 185/70r14 to bridgestone turanza 205/60r15
lost 1mpg. upgraded to 15 alloys (oem take-offs). Much more fun to drive and car looked better. the rounded sidewall ate up small bumps and road rumble. well worth the 1 mpg.
2002 accord tiger paw 195/65r15 to potenza 205/60r15
lost 2 mpg. car felt heavier more sure-footed, looked better, the rounded sidewall ate up small bumps and road rumble. at 3$ gas the mpg hit was annoying.
Also did it to a pathfinder but I don't recall the sizes and don't want to make it up. These two I remember. It was about the same 1 mpg or so.
Mike
Meep,
You should be aware, that unused tires have more rolling resistance than worn out tires - all other things being equal.
You should also be aware that OE tires generally have lower rolling resistance than tire designed strictly for the replacement market.
And third, wider tires will have more rolling resistance - all other things being equal. The problem with this statement is that it is impossible for the other things to be equal. If you change the tire width, you also change the aspect ratio, or the load carrying capacity - and the list goes on. Technical people would call this a problem in "confounding" - that the thing you are trying to measure is a function of multiple things that are interrelated.
So, your Subaru may have taken 2 hits - the size and the worn vs new thing - and may be 3, but that depends on whether the 205/60R15's were OE or not.
Your Accord probably took 2 hits - the size and the worn vs new thing - and probably a 3rd. The Potenza probably wasn't OE!
Your Pathfinder - well there is at least the new vs worn thing.
Here's a bit more detail if you want to explore more of the "Why's" of how this works:
http://www.geocities.com/barrystiretech/rrandfe.html
You should be aware, that unused tires have more rolling resistance than worn out tires - all other things being equal.
You should also be aware that OE tires generally have lower rolling resistance than tire designed strictly for the replacement market.
And third, wider tires will have more rolling resistance - all other things being equal. The problem with this statement is that it is impossible for the other things to be equal. If you change the tire width, you also change the aspect ratio, or the load carrying capacity - and the list goes on. Technical people would call this a problem in "confounding" - that the thing you are trying to measure is a function of multiple things that are interrelated.
So, your Subaru may have taken 2 hits - the size and the worn vs new thing - and may be 3, but that depends on whether the 205/60R15's were OE or not.
Your Accord probably took 2 hits - the size and the worn vs new thing - and probably a 3rd. The Potenza probably wasn't OE!
Your Pathfinder - well there is at least the new vs worn thing.
Here's a bit more detail if you want to explore more of the "Why's" of how this works:
http://www.geocities.com/barrystiretech/rrandfe.html
Originally Posted By: toyotaguy
That is a very good question. If not I will just go with the oem 195. Not that big of a deal. But I was just more concern with ride comfort and stability then mpg. If I drop lets say 2 mpg I will not sweat that. Any idea what kind of milage drop I could except from going from 195 to 215?
I say thats pretty close!
That is a very good question. If not I will just go with the oem 195. Not that big of a deal. But I was just more concern with ride comfort and stability then mpg. If I drop lets say 2 mpg I will not sweat that. Any idea what kind of milage drop I could except from going from 195 to 215?
heavier tires increase the stopping distance!
Heavier tires will also increase acceleration distance. Faster they spin, the more your engine has to work, unsprung weight is a... lol
Wider/heavier tires also put more strain on the drive train. If you like to drive hard, this is a big factor to consider. Not hooking up, can = long drive train life. Hooking up when hard launching shock loads everything, and can cause things to snap.
Wider/heavier tires also put more strain on the drive train. If you like to drive hard, this is a big factor to consider. Not hooking up, can = long drive train life. Hooking up when hard launching shock loads everything, and can cause things to snap.
Michelin Energy tires are typically the best for fuel economy, but they also cost a lot more than other tires of the same size.
When deciding whether they are worth it, you have to predict what will happen to fuel prices. If fuel stays cheap, then you can save more money on cheaper tires than you will spend on additional fuel.
But if fuel goes back up to $4-5/gallon or more, then the Michelins might be cheaper to own in the long run.
When deciding whether they are worth it, you have to predict what will happen to fuel prices. If fuel stays cheap, then you can save more money on cheaper tires than you will spend on additional fuel.
But if fuel goes back up to $4-5/gallon or more, then the Michelins might be cheaper to own in the long run.
Does low rolling resistance tires = poor traction ?
Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
Does low rolling resistance tires = poor traction ?
It's a triangle: Rolling Resistance / Traction / Treadwear
Does low rolling resistance tires = poor traction ?
It's a triangle: Rolling Resistance / Traction / Treadwear
- Status
